Page images

this subject. There is one college, at least, which has already taken steps to meet us on this point. I agree that in most of our high schools we cannot provide for instruction in Greek. It would bring criticism on the high schools. We cannot get our boards of education to put in Greek. The colleges must make some concession on this point. This college has, and I presume other colleges are just as willing to do it as Oberlin. I believe this question must be settled in such a way that we can enter our boys and girls in the Freshman class.

Dr. W. H. SCOTT :-I should like to call the attention of the Association to the fact that this matter has already been before the College Association of the State, At a meeting held in Granville it was decided that measures should be taken whereby the student would be afforded an opportunity to bring up his Greek after he has entered the Freshman class. I would also call your attention to the fact that many of the colleges have adopted courses of study without the Greek. There are other colleges in the State which do not begin the subject of Greek until the Freshman year. The college men have recognized the fact that it is impossible to provide for the study of Greek in the high schools, and they have sought in this way to meet the demands of the high schools.

DR. TAPPAN :-Mr. President, I am profoundly convinced that you are very much mistaken. There is scarcely a college in the United States but will receive pupils who have received enough preparation for the class, though it may not hava been in the line required. I would not attempt to make a course of study in our high schools to fit any college or any set of colleges. What do we want in our course of study? I think there is a very common error on both sides. What do we want with reference to the study of language? Shall we put off all study of language besides English until children are fifteen or sixteen years of age? If we do, the great mass of children will never learn any other language but English. It is a great error to force the higher mathematics into the heads of children before they are able to appreciate this kind of general reasoning. I am satisfied that children can learn language at a much earlier age than they are generally put to learn it. Children would have a better command of English and be better able to think if they began the study of language at an earlier age.. We cannot be teaching language well unless we are helping them to improve their thinking. Let us teach language sooner than we do. German has many advantages over the other languages, because it is most common in the United States. I think a spoken language is the best. I would say to my college friends, you make a great mistake by putting Greek so early in your

If the children could be taught Latin earlier and have most of the Latin work done before they enter college, they would in the end be better Greek scholars. In this I am sustained by the opinion of some of the best teachers in the State of Ohio. We would have better Greek scholars if they would begin the Greek after they enter college. When you say that we must demand concessions, we are demanding something which we cannot get. I believe it would be better if the Latin were begun at nine years of age. Pupils would have better command of language in general if they would begin the study of at least one foreign language when they are nine years of age.

Col. D. F. DEWOLF:- It seemed to me that this question was most admirably settled in '81 and '83. The same conclusion was reached that has been stated



in this report. I think there was a disposition at that time to do all that could be done by the colleges to admit pupils that come from the different schools. I am interested in this matter, because I want all the boys in the State of Ohio to go to college if we can get them to go. I believe in our teachers doing all they can to urge their young people to enter college and take a thorough course of instruction. I agree with Dr. Tappan in what he said about beginning the study of the languages early. If we could give two-thirds of the time we spend on English grammar to the Latin, we should know ten times as much as we do about English grammar.

Dr. E. E. WHITE:-I think the colleges make this concession earlier than has been stated. It is not quite fair to the colleges to put this date later. This whole question of Greek was discussed in '64. That concession was made as early as '68, and students were admitted to Western Reserve College, and also to Marietta, without Greek.



BY N. H. CHANEY. · Every human institution consists of three essential factors ; purpose, power, and method ; all else is but embellishment. These factors constitute the tripod. of its life, the sources of its strength, the elements of its perfection. They are the pillars which uphold every system of laws, usages, or “regulations of extensive and recurring operations” whose object is to“ generate, effect, regulate, or sanction a succession of acts, transactions, or productions of a peculiar kind or class.” Without these, there can be no worthy institution-in fact, no real institution at all, for they are the essentials of all worthy, useful conduct. Life itself is a combination of these elements, a unit of vitalized purpose, power and method. All rational action is resolvable into these component parts, all results are multiples of these prime factors, all perfection, a due admixture of three ingredients.

Institutions, of whatever name and nature, commercial, charitable, cultural, secular or sectarian, are organized purposes, powers and methods, whether they exist in faithful breasts, concerted action, or constructed adamant. The buildings we erect are only material creations into which is breathed a living soul of human purpose, power and method. As God breathed his triune nature into forms of clay for men, so man breathes his essential nature into forms of matter for institutions. By this term, then, do not understand us to mean some building or mechanical device, but a living, intangible, all-pervading spirit of purpose, power and method, which is generally but not essentially identified with works of art. The one is spiritual, the other physical ; wbile in extent one institution may outreach a million works of art and spread its influence throughout the world.

Such is the importance and scope of man's self-realization, and such his relations to nature, that he is often compelled to construct tangible forms and give his real institutions a “ local habitation and a name.” He wants, at times, to stake down a purpose, fix a power, and determine a method. As his wants

vary, his purposes are differentiated in new combinations of power and method. These he fixes, one by one, in various works of art, and calls them home, shop, bank, court, church or school-all of which are the outer-fixtures of some combination of purpose, power and method.

The perfection of any or all of these institutions depends upon the harmonious development of their three inherent elements; and in order that a full completion be realized, the purpose must be perfect, the method efficient and the pover sufficient. Each element must not only be distinct and competent in itself, but co-operative with the others, and then the proper and natural success is the realization in full of the perfect purpose. But if any one of these be defective, if, for instance, the purpose below or ill-defined, if the method be poor or shifting, if the power be feeble or spasmodic, no worthy result can be obtained. These essential factors indicate the line of critical analysis by which vital defects are to be determined and classified. And as we are to study that particular institution known as the Public School of Ohio, we will proceed by testing its purpose, power and method.

It is, therefore, our duty to inquire what is, not the general or liberal, but the perfect purpose of the state in the organization, operation and perpetuation of a system of public schools. What is its definite,' avowed purpose ? its direct, vital aim ? What does it want, expect and realize? what does it accept as its full success? What does the state mean by assuming the work of educating its citizens? What is it in them of which it wants more, or what has it of which it wants them to have more? To all these queries, the state proudly cites the first clause of Art. III, Ordinance of '87, as the full exponent of its perfect purpose. Hear it: Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.Let us look deeply into this. The purpose here avowed is, plainly, good government and happiness, one and inseparable. The method of producing it is schools and the means of education necessarily operating the implied pover of instruction. Good government and happiness-two powerful co-ordinates

— interlocking the vitals of both man and state. But does the great State of Ohio equivocate or practice subterfuge with that word “good ?" Does it mean, do-as-you-please, in a word that naturally means do-as-you-ought? Let us be bold with this giant and demand its cordial intent at the peril of its life. If it may speak through us it surely means, a wise, right self-government of individuality, transacting private and public business by the rule of equal justice, and when robed with the toga of authority and the title of citizen, abide still in the majestic majesty of its own essential manhood. Hence, this word “good” is but the silken cord by which the state binds religion, morality and knowledge, all pure and undefiled, into a happy union of character, and calls it good government.

But Ohio has no established state religion to be operated within the schools. She patronizes all religions with her intangible but invaluable wealth of liberty and good will. She acknowledges it an essential factor in her completeness but leaves private or sectarian institutions to take care of its formal cultivation. She does, however, expect its broad spirit to be utilized in a high moral sense which will contribute to the establishment of sound morality. The state proposes to take care of morality and knowledge by public policies, leaving the doctrines of the higher life as the special province of religious creeds. It has certain knowledge which it wants the individual to possess and regards him as

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]


the only source of those moral qualities it seeks and needs for itself. In the great emporium of the school, the state holds commerce with the individual. There it proposes to stamp moral bullion with a civil mint-mark, and make it the coin of the empire. There the civic man is to be made the plumed knight of national honor. The state has assumed this work upon the basis that the interests of individuals and communities are identified with good government, which depends upon morality and knowledge, and that these depend upon education for union into citizenship. Now it will readily be conceded that morality without knowledge does not make citizenship efficient, nor does knowledge without morality make it sufficient. Only when the two are united in one integral does the sacred result go forth. For morality gives quality and knowledge quantity to a man. The one gires right conduct, the other right assertion, the two the sufficient man and citizen.

Good citizenship is not strong, sharp thought so much as safe and solid conduct. It can spare more of knowledge than morality. It is not a big brain half 50 much as a bold heart; not intellectual manhood so surely as moral manhood ; not a skilled ability to act at any hazard, but a wise courage to do right at any cost; not a dare-devil shrewdness to scale the eminences of social, political and financial immoralities, but a plain, resolute will to hold the highway of the common welfare and the public good. It is the due admixture of a pure, bold heart with a wise sound head that constitutes that lofty, civil manhood which is the full exponent of the perfect purpose of the state. A clean man, with clean ways and keen thoughts, is the embodiment of the state ideal of a perfect citi.

We use the term civil to denote a man's relation to the state, and civic, his relations to his neighbor, and State ideal to denote, not any one man's idea, but the common accord of the wisest and best citizens, in their wisest and best moods, which accord we are safe in calling a wise, clean manhood. Hence, a statehood is a civil manhood, composed of a census of wise clean, civic manhood, which, we claim, is the avowed purpose of the state to produce through schools and the means of education. This avowal is neither low nor ill-defined. What, then, is the condition of our citizenship with reference to it? Simply this: Our commonwealth is wiser than good, prouder of appearance than principles, more egotistic than ethical. The people know far better than they do, they comprehend vastly more of right and justice than they exemplify, they apprehend more than they want to perform, and are far more capable than clean. Knowledge is not at so great a premium gas morality, and within Buckeye borders knowledge of what is right to do outweighs good citizen conduct, as a millstone a pebble. There is more mental vehemence directed towards selfexaltation, than moral reflection towards purity and state preservation. There is more “hunger and thirst after unrighteousness than righteousness. Originalities in lawlessness and diabolism stand like armed troops around the tournaments of our unskilled civilities. Perversions and sophistries, false wisdom a ptly aping the true, wrong principles and worse practices joined in pernicious examples, put to shame our efforts to harness the wrong and let the right go free. We are less endangered by illiteracy than by immorality, less oppressed by ignorant wrong than by wise depravity. It is a broad knowledge of many things enthroned in the heads of characterless men that constitutes our growing peril. It is not ignorant good or evil that we fear so much as anchorless wisdom, skilled to realize its unhallowed purposes. This condition is wrong, and never to be regarded as right because popular. The public good is not yet a ruling passion in the Buckeye State, and conscious right often finds itself a mocked minority. Is there then any defect in the purpose of the state? In its avoual ? No! In its practice? Yes, something decidedly defective, for it fulfils but little more than one-half of its original purpose.

The state has divorced, by neglect to enforce, what it once avowedly joined together; so that, at present, popular education has no essential connection with right conduct. Knowledge is desirable only as it finds expression in moral actions, yet the proclamation of the ordinance of '87 demands of the schools the development of a morality sufficient to direct knowledge in keeping with its purpose. It has never avowedly divorced morality and knowledge. It did not formerly, nor does it now expect religion to consecrate its strength. Statistics show that churches control only 10 or 12 percent of the available culture of the schools,so that the major part of civic and civil conduct is either the direct product or license of this public institution. Thousands of children are never so near to decent tutorage as when in school, and never nearer a cleansing fountain than a pure, wise teacher. Certainly the reasons for the state assuming control of education at all, demand that it prosecute its work in every line known to conduce toward good citizenship. Three roots, says the state, support good citizenship and happiness, two of which, morality and knowledge, it holds it a personal duty to cultivate. What is its practical method for this? Exclusive brain culture! But sheer intellectualisin has the testimony of the ages against it as a sufficient power to produce that character which bolwarks a nation. The centuries have known all the while that no dependence could be put upon knowledge simply, to make sacrifice of self to subserve external inter

Education, mainly because patronized by state policies, has been confined to those faculties through which knowledge is gained, and studiously withheld from dominion over disposition and will. And yet the state is interested far more in what a man does than in what he thinks. It cares nothing about abstract thought till realized in concrete conduct. For it is not intellect that makes a man or a citizen, so much as it is the man that makes the intellect and the citizen. For in all thought and actions it is the weight and power of the man that gives depth, reach and decision, and the needed discipline always is that that penetrates intellect through and through with the qualities of genuine manhood and arms it with vigilance and prudence. No “vainish and veneer” of scholarship, no command of “tricks” in the trade of arguing, no double dealing with right and wrong, no soft dalliance with ties of endearments, no “fast and loose” with virtue, can make a man a positive civil force though wise as wisdom herself. Education that ignores the quality and augments the quantity of self-assertion confers a doubtful benefit on its votaries.

The head culture of our scbools is quite a different thing from the heart culture, or, to be rightly understood, from the culture of the disposition and will, And three bold facts are to be here remembered. First, all purely brain culture develops only power of assertion and may avail rascality as well as morality. Second, good citizenship is not of the brain but of the disposition of

Third, all disposition manifested in character is the conscious poise of a man's deep self from his own dynamic volition or from influences from without, and in every case is educable. If disposition is educable it is then open to the schools, and if it determines conduct it is therefore the vis vitae of cit



« PreviousContinue »